Re: operator precedence issues
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: operator precedence issues |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20130903140532.GE5783@awork2.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: operator precedence issues (Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: operator precedence issues
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-09-03 08:59:53 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote: > While playing around with Andres's trick, I noticed that it works but > will not match against operators taking "any" although those will > match with explicit schema declaration (FWICT it goes through the > search_path trying to explicitly match int/int operator then goes > again matches "any"). That's pretty weird: Not surprising. We look for the best match for an operator and explicitly matching types will be that. If there were no operator(int, int) your anyelement variant should get called. > Ideally though you could specify operator precedence in the operator > name itself though in such a way that bison pick it up. I don't know > if that's possible since so many operator names have been given out > without any thought to reserving characters for precedence, or if it > would be worth the extra parsing time even if you could do it. > Overriding stock operator behaviors is a really dodgy practice with > the limited but important exception of handling certain classes of > mathematical errors. I have to say, even those it seems like it's primary advantage is making it harder to read the code, but YMMV. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: